ArticleWorld neurosurgery: X2024
Analysis of reasons for medical malpractice litigation due to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Article in World neurosurgery: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of Orthopaedic Surgeon Expert Witnesses in Pediatric Orthopaedic Malpractice Litigation: A Multi-Decade Analysis.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using allograft cellular bone matrix.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Characteristics of the Top 50 Most Cited Orthopaedic Surgery Articles on Malpractice and Litigation: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Review
- Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are associated with increased readmission and reoperation rates following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a propensity-matched cohort study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- A Comparative Risk Analysis of Malpractice Claims in Hand Surgeons Trained in Plastic and Orthopedic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Is outcome of anterior cervical discectomy for cervical radiculopathy influenced by securing the intervertebral cage?Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Use of awl for screw pilot hole creation increases strength of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion plate constructs in biomimetic model.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusions (ACDF) are among the most common cervical spine operations, with over 137,000 surgeries performed annually. Understanding reasons underlying malpractice pertaining to ACDF may inform physicians of practices to improve delivery of patient care and mitigate malpractice. The aim of our study was to analyze the causes and outcomes for lawsuits pertaining to ACDF. Methods: The Westlaw Edge and Verdict Search databases were queried for malpractice claims utilizing the keywords "anterior cervical discectomy and fusion" and "ACDF". Inclusion criteria was based on relevance of case grievance(s) to ACDF. Data collected included date of case hearing, plaintiff demographics, defendant specialty, verdict ruling, location of filed claim, monetary award, and sustained injuries. Results: Fifty cases were included in this study after excluding 1933 cases. Of the 50 cases, 34 (68%) resulted in a defendant outcome, 8 (16%) resulted in a plaintiff outcome, and 8 (16%) resulted in settlement. Plaintiff verdicts resulted in an average monetary payment of $9.70 million, while settlements resulted in an average payment of $2.06 million. Reasons for litigation were divided into 10 categories, most commonly improper postoperative management (20%), hardware failure (18%), intraoperative error (14%), off-label use of implants (14%), and insufficient informed consent (12%). Conclusions: Malpractice claims due to ACDF are associated with higher frequencies of plaintiff verdicts and higher monetary costs compared to other spinal surgery procedures. There does not appear to be supporting evidence that spinal cord neuromonitoring is mandatory for ACDF procedures from a medicolegal standpoint.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.